Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Police claim they don't need law to stop photographer taking pictures

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

55% OFF new PortraitPro 12 - use code EPHZROS414.
User_Removed
30 Jun 2010 - 12:23 PM

I thought it was illegal now to take photos of the police or anyone in the armed forces, on or off duty. Being in a public place doesn't even give you rights to do this I think. It's something about the photos being used to identify members of the security services. I am not sure I am right about this but am sure I read it somewhere. This is why the police often tape over their numbers on demonstrations , that and the fact that they can't then be identified when kicking the c$$p out of someone.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
30 Jun 2010 - 12:23 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

thewilliam
30 Jun 2010 - 12:59 PM

Whenever a police officer is filmed while he's beating the living daylights out of a protester, the identity number is invariably taped. I'm just surprised that they're not masked as well - gasmasks are perfecr for this purpose.

Roughly half of the business of the European Court (covering 25 nations) concerns the misdeeds of our government and that's after the vexatious cases have been weeded out. Says it all!

User_Removed
30 Jun 2010 - 1:07 PM

I just watched the video, well listened to it, it sounds like the police really don't have a clue about the law, but, it also sounds like he went out to deliberately attract police attention. He’s an annoying little git that really gives street photography a bad name and makes it worse for everyone else. I suspect it was a simple money making exercise by him, knowing the reaction he would get and knowing he would get some compensation from the courts. I hope it hurt when he fell down the steps. In the old days a policeman would have tried to stop him falling and “unfortunately been put off balance while trying to aid him” and would have landed on him at the bottom of the steps, knee first.

keith selmes
30 Jun 2010 - 1:24 PM


Quote: I thought it was illegal now to take photos of the police or anyone in the armed forces, on or off duty.

No it isn't. Only in fairly specific circumstances.

Metropolitan Police advice on photography

Quote: Any officer making an arrest for an offence under Section 58A must be able to demonstrate a reasonable suspicion that the information was, by its very nature, designed to provide practical assistance to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism

It would ordinarily be unlawful to use section 58A to arrest people photographing police officers in the course of normal policing activities, including protests because there would not normally be grounds for suspecting that the photographs were being taken to provide assistance to a terrorist.

User_Removed
30 Jun 2010 - 1:43 PM


Quote: No it isn't. Only in fairly specific circumstances.

Thanks I had obviously read something wrongly.

Credibles
Credibles  6
30 Jun 2010 - 1:57 PM

They could possibly use the excuse that these cadets may one day be undercover officer's and their security may be compromised, but that would be stretching it to far.
However, we must be aware that like everyone else they make mistakes and it is up to the photographer to politely inform them regarding the law in taking photographs in a public area.

I have had one incident where I deleted my images when challenged by a council official (later to found wrong in doing so), and will not do it again. Stand your ground, but be polite and proffesional if possible.

KevSB
KevSB  101390 forum posts United Kingdom5 Constructive Critique Points
30 Jun 2010 - 4:30 PM

From what I have read and heard on the tape....he was asked for name and address, he refused and started quoting laws ect, thats when it spiraled out of control on both sides, all it needed was a little common sense and would not have got out of control as it did.

There is a official complaints procedure which he could have followed, this is more about getting name in the paper blowing a stupid situation into a Drama and claiming compensation.
, I suspect there where hundreds of cameras at this rally yet no one else was stopped, Does that not sound strange. The tape also mentions he was in front of the soldiers and in the way, could it be he was stepping into the parade to get that picture!

Another case of a low level officer making a foolish statement based on his misunderstanding of the law, That needs addressing obviously but its not helped by some child who refuses to identify himself when asked and can be done via the complaints procedure, not trial by press but im sure this will now cost the taxpayer. Our young are much more comfortable with the compensation culture than some of us oldies.

keith selmes
30 Jun 2010 - 5:35 PM


Quote: a foolish statement based on his misunderstanding of the law

On balance, I thought I heard some statements that were incorrect, but the officer who said he doesn't need a law seemed to be trying to say something more explanatory, but didn't get the chance, as he was dealing with a slightly voluble and excitable 16 year old.
It ddidn't seem as if the boy was trying to grab publicity, but he did sound very immature and agitated, understandably perhaps, but not the best recipe for negotiating with the police.
All a bit of a mess really. On the story and video as presented, I could sympathise with both sides.


Quote: could it be he was stepping into the parade to get that picture!

At that point, probably, and after that I thought he was on a rather sticky wicket.

v8dunc
v8dunc  7333 forum posts Scotland4 Constructive Critique Points
30 Jun 2010 - 6:40 PM

On the audio tape the first thing the boy is asking is why he needed to supply his ID card,and asking for it to be returned. so obviously he freely supplied his name and address ,
if people are going to criticise somebody at least get the available facts correct

Duncan

Jestertheclown
30 Jun 2010 - 6:50 PM


Quote: if people are going to criticise somebody at least get the available facts correct

As I've already said, none of us know, or ever will know the facts, available or otherwise so remarks like this leave you on rather thin ice.

Graywolf
Graywolf  6964 forum posts United Kingdom
30 Jun 2010 - 8:03 PM

16 year old with a camera..

..soft target

Jestertheclown
30 Jun 2010 - 8:28 PM


Quote: 16 year old with a camera..

. . . and quite conceivably a big mouth.

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1214398 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
30 Jun 2010 - 8:28 PM

In all the years I`ve taken pictures, I`ve never been stopped or questioned anywhere.

I`ve seen plenty of other`s stopped and questioned and I`m really not surprised Sad

thewilliam
30 Jun 2010 - 8:29 PM

Just don't walk on the cracks in the pavement.

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1214398 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
30 Jun 2010 - 8:53 PM


Quote: Just don't walk on the cracks in the pavement

Haha, that`s just asking for it, and the white van Smile

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.